From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Crockett v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 7, 1993
189 A.D.2d 591 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Summary

affirming denial of summary judgment to defendants because "there is substantial evidence which demonstrates that the building has been the scene of many past crimes and that defendants have been aware of said criminal history as well as the broken lock on the front door for some time."

Summary of this case from Burgos v. Aqueduct Realty Corp.

Opinion

January 7, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Alfred Toker, J.).


On a motion for summary judgment, the moving party has the initial burden of establishing its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562). While defendant urges that the assailants in this case could have been guests of a tenant, or could have gained access to the building other than through the unlocked front doors, there is no proof to support such speculation. Plaintiff herself has testified that the assailants were not tenants of the building and likely entered through the unlocked front doors. In addition, there is substantial evidence which demonstrates that the building has been the scene of many past crimes and that defendants have been aware of said criminal history as well as the broken lock on the front door for some time. Under these circumstances, defendant failed to satisfy its burden of proof (see, Russo v. Grace Inst., 145 Misc.2d 242, affd 153 A.D.2d 820).

Concur — Milonas, J.P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Kassal, JJ.


Summaries of

Crockett v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 7, 1993
189 A.D.2d 591 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

affirming denial of summary judgment to defendants because "there is substantial evidence which demonstrates that the building has been the scene of many past crimes and that defendants have been aware of said criminal history as well as the broken lock on the front door for some time."

Summary of this case from Burgos v. Aqueduct Realty Corp.
Case details for

Crockett v. New York City Housing Authority

Case Details

Full title:TERRI CROCKETT, Respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jan 7, 1993

Citations

189 A.D.2d 591 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
592 N.Y.S.2d 26

Citing Cases

Targovnik v. 460 West 34th Street Associates

The IAS Court properly denied appellants ("the Kaufman defendants") summary judgment in this action arising…

Maheras v. Awan

It stated that the various allegations against Ali did not constitute fraud, and that Ali was just "doing a…